Talk:Wounded Knee Massacre

Is the statement that " the massacre was part of the larger genocide of indigenous peoples in the Americas" appropriate?
There was a recently added edit to the front summarized section of this article included " the massacre was part of the larger genocide of indigenous peoples in the Americas." Originally, the cited source was an official PRC URL.

This additional statement in the summary section appears to lack an appropriate reliable source and questions about neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KVJackson (talk • contribs) 17:10, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * My question is this: Who is currently arguing that the "Indian Wars" were not a prima facie genocide? jengod (talk) 17:47, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the term "genocide" was used in the lead section but information & references to back that term up do not appear within the main body of the article text. I wouldn't say that a genocide did not happen, just that the concept & term along with references from reliable sources need to appear within the main body for the term to appear within the lead section. As MOS:LEAD says (bolding mine):
 * In Wikipedia, the lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents.
 * Shearonink (talk) 18:03, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I fully concur with Shearonink's point.
 * I also note that jengod has not provided an appropriate reliable citation or source for the assertion. Even with that, the assertion of genocide may be legally disputed. Are there any USG official acknowledging genocide?
 * The May 1922 report "Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative Investigative Report" probably is closest: "This report confirms that the United States directly targeted American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian children in the pursuit of a policy of cultural assimilation that coincided with Indian territorial dispossession." However, the word genocide does not (yet) appear.
 * The determination of whether a historical event should or should not be considered a genocide can be a matter of scholarly and legal debate. KVJackson (talk) 20:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have the bandwidth to relitigate American history on this page, but my take is that the whole thing easily meets the 1948 UN description of genocide:
 * killing members of the group ✔️
 * causing them serious bodily or mental harm ✔️
 * imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group ✔️
 * preventing births ✔️
 * forcibly transferring children out of the group ✔️
 * The justice.gov definition of genocide is "violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group" is a fine summary of the Wounded Knee Massacre, the Sand Creek Massacre, the Camp Grant Massacre, 1862 Dakota executions, the Marias Massacre, ad infinitum.
 * Extrajudicial colonizer massacres are terrible enough but when it is the United States Army pulling the trigger, you're automatically in capital-G Genocide territory. I don't have time right now to create a section of this article affirmatively proving Your Favorite All-American Pioneers and Very Brave Boys in Blue Were like Actual Real Live Genocidaires so that it can then be responsibly referenced in the lede but until the mindset of the U.S. moves out of its fugue state of denial I suppose this perspective can be considered a Non-Neutral Point of View.
 * I'm ranting like a loon when you all have been eminently civil but the whole question of "was it genocidal?" just makes me do the LeBron GIF face.
 * We're all just trying to do the right thing. Thank you for all your work here, and thank you for your patience with my high-pitched noises and gesturing.
 * jengod (talk) 21:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I am no longer shocked by the intellectual incompetence of Wikipedia editors. Don't quit the day job. 212.129.80.155 (talk) 06:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes absolutely it’s appropriate and a statement in fact. 2600:1700:E1C1:3890:414F:D1A7:7CE4:866A (talk) 22:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Turning hawk seems made up
simple as that. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C00E:C617:8861:85EF (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * How about reading the cited New York Times reference. Simple as that. Shearonink (talk) 02:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Not true
The depiction of the events is completely subjective and not even accurate. Pay attention Wikipedia, someone needs to fix this. 2603:6011:AD3F:A70E:5108:4655:F2B4:3EFB (talk) 20:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)